NCAA's Broken Dynasty Mode -- Another reason we need a revolution

[dabigman9748]

Woah! I'm shocked! The same game that was supposed to be the "savior of the NCAA Football series" has major problems! Give it up guys, it's like this every year! First we hear about what a great game it is and how it's the best football game ever! Then a couple of weeks later, we find out that it has major problems. Every year Chris calls the new NCAA football the best ever, only to call the previous year's iteration complete trash. EVERY YEAR!

EA hasn't made a decent NCAA without a major problem since 2006 on last gen. They just don't get it. I haven't bought since '09 because it's pretty much the same game with a few minor enhancements. I lol at all the times EA talks about how they have totally revamped something when really all the did was add a little polish to it.

In the words of the great Luther Vandross: "It all ends up the same. It's never gonna change."

[srudoff]

Quote: Originally Posted by youALREADYknow

I can't decide what is more disturbing. A. The fact that dynasty mode (aside from the introduction of Online Dynasty) hasn't changed much in 13 years and has actually regressed since last gen. B. The fact that EA has had 13 years to nail down prospect generation, progression, and CPU recruiting strategy and yet still has so many release issues regarding these areas every year. It leads me as an outside observer to believe that the NCAA product team simply does not value their "hardcore" dynasty mode user community. They must not invest much in the way of time and resources into this mode. The only areas which have seen work done are areas which can be marketed as "new". See Online Dynasty, new recruiting engine, and custom conferences. These are all nice additions, but do little to address the foundation of the dynasty mode. It's likely because the meat and potatoes of a true dynasty mode isn't sexy stuff... it doesn't sell games on it's own. The true dynasty mode players are looking for AI and simulation on par with games such as OOTP Baseball. Casual gamers and EA apologists will claim that this is an unrealistic expectation and we should be happy with what we have. I vehemently disagree because OOTP has/had ONE DEVELOPER! ONE! ONE PERSON! That's how much it takes to get realistic prospect generation, simulation statistics, and true attention to detail. ONE PERSON. That's the reason some of us can't just sit back and act like everything is alright. If this was an unprecedented standard that we held EA to, then the complacency would be understandable. As it stands, we're merely asking for a product to actually work as intended. We're asking for product quality. We're asking for something that has been accomplished before by development shops with far fewer resources and tighter budgets.

sorry but you can't compare a graphics driven ps3/360 game with a text only baseball sim that only works on pc/mac. ootp would have to be dumbed down big time to 1. include next gen graphics and 2. run on a console. all you have to do is look at mlb the show for an example - looks beautiful - amazing game play - stupid FA logic - stupid trade logic.

ea sports doesn't have to cater to the hard core dynasty players because, quite frankly, it probably makes up less than half of one percent of their total market - if that. i'd be willing to guess that a very small percentage of the people that buy ncaa 11 actually gets past the third year in a dynasty. hell i've bought madden and mlb the show every year forever and have never gone past year 2 in madden and only this year went past year 3 in the show.

if you ran a company, you wouldn't cater to such a small group of customers if it meant spending a lot more money on development and testing. those people are most likely going to buy your game anyway and just complain about it, so you're not really losing that much revenue. so you cut costs and barely lose revenue - that is how you make a profit.

do i wish they would change it? yes - ncaa is the one game that i always play multiple seasons. but being a manager in the business world, you understand how the machine works and you just shrug your shoulders and buy the game because you know you'd probably do it the same way if you were put in the same position. profit is king - and if you can't generate it, someone else will in your place.

[youALREADYknow]

Quote: Originally Posted by srudoff

sorry but you can't compare a graphics driven ps3/360 game with a text only baseball sim that only works on pc/mac. ootp would have to be dumbed down big time to 1. include next gen graphics and 2. run on a console. all you have to do is look at mlb the show for an example - looks beautiful - amazing game play - stupid FA logic - stupid trade logic.

The generation of prospect ratings, player progression, and other object oriented data-driven programming has virtually nothing to do with the 3-D engine and/or console based gaming.

I agree with everything else you said from the business perspective, but the fact remains that EA has someone on the payroll who is responsible for this task every year. If a game with one man in charge of such programming can produce a quality product on an annual basis, then I see no reason why EA cannot produce the same quality even with one man tasked with these areas of the game.

Profit is king though as you said. The sad thing is that nobody else can generate it and therefore EA holds the key to the profit castle in the football world. I'm actually satisfied with the work that has gone into this year's game considering the lack of competition, but there are some areas where either a lack of expertise/skill or a lack of QA efforts are apparent.

[youALREADYknow]

Quote: Originally Posted by dabigman9748

Woah! I'm shocked! The same game that was supposed to be the "savior of the NCAA Football series" has major problems! Give it up guys, it's like this every year! First we hear about what a great game it is and how it's the best football game ever! Then a couple of weeks later, we find out that it has major problems.

Unlike in past years where this game has been practically a disaster IMO, this year's game is better by leaps and bounds. I think it's fair to say that this will be the best NCAA game ever if the majority of the known bugs and flaws are patched out.

[Bellsprout]

"NCAA's dynasty mode is horribly broken this year."
"this just shows how horribly stale Dynasty mode is in NCAA."

Are there editors here? Does anybody read articles before they go up? Someone should have caught how dumb that looks. Especially given how close they are to each other in the article.

Anyways, continue with the topic...

[southwvboy]

I'm not big on the recruiting portion of the game but I had to sign up to post my anger when I finished my season last night with Tulsa. I was looking through the conf. standings and saw that both Nevada and Boise State finished 1st in the conference with 7 - 0 records. At least when you play your first season these two are not on each others schedule and you can't add them either. Now this is just two teams so who knows how many more there is. Plus they have the bowls all jacked up. They have the Big East no. 2 team going to bowls like the Armed Forces bowl or GMAC Bowl. Way to go EA way to go.

[Segagendude]

I have a question about all this progression stuff. More like, trying to read into minds of certain gamers:

Out of curiosity, why do some buy a new game, then sim ahead 5, 10, 15+ years? What's the point? I mean, simming past this current season, I can understand. You may want to start building a new dynasty from scratch, so simming 1 year ahead makes sense to me.

But more than that? See, I guess I'm a different kind of gamer. I like playing along with the current season, then taking a break and starting up again when the real next season begins. I never sim; I play every game just like real life.

So I guess I don't really understand the point of simming so far ahead to see what, how progression is "broken?" I mean, isn't that similar to renting a movie only to fast forward right to the end? Or skipping right to the end of a book for that matter, to see if you like it?

It's not just here, I see this in The Show forums, and Madden as well.Guys buying these games and within three days, already simmed to the season 2016, for example. Again, what are you looking for?

As to the question of " How did the testers miss this???" I'd venture a guess that they don't sim either; they probably play for hours on end looking for immediate bugs and glitches. Also, the devs probably figure that most hardcore gamers will only play for this year, then piddle around in offseason, then buy next year's game, do it again, and so on.

This is kinda long, I know. Again my question is, why sim so far ahead instead of play out each game in the current season, then proceed to the offseason? What are you looking for?

Thanks...

[GJEM]

Quote: Originally Posted by Segagendude

I have a question about all this progression stuff. More like, trying to read into minds of certain gamers: Out of curiosity, why do some buy a new game, then sim ahead 5, 10, 15+ years? What's the point? I mean, simming past this current season, I can understand. You may want to start building a new dynasty from scratch, so simming 1 year ahead makes sense to me. But more than that? See, I guess I'm a different kind of gamer. I like playing along with the current season, then taking a break and starting up again when the real next season begins. I never sim; I play every game just like real life. So I guess I don't really understand the point of simming so far ahead to see what, how progression is "broken?" I mean, isn't that similar to renting a movie only to fast forward right to the end? Or skipping right to the end of a book for that matter, to see if you like it? It's not just here, I see this in The Show forums, and Madden as well.Guys buying these games and within three days, already simmed to the season 2016, for example. Again, what are you looking for? As to the question of " How did the testers miss this???" I'd venture a guess that they don't sim either; they probably play for hours on end looking for immediate bugs and glitches. Also, the devs probably figure that most hardcore gamers will only play for this year, then piddle around in offseason, then buy next year's game, do it again, and so on. This is kinda long, I know. Again my question is, why sim so far ahead instead of play out each game in the current season, then proceed to the offseason? What are you looking for? Thanks...

Most of the people on here talking about the progression problem don't sim that far ahead, but the problem they're talking about becomes more apparent once you past season 1 really.